5. Group think doesn't do it for me

Because I thought it woudl be a site where progressives debate ideas. Instead, it is a "group think" zone that doesn't encourage or allow dissent -- that I find as mindless as the meaningless as the a Tea Party site must be.

7. not true....

....I'm a liberal gay man, who is liberal in nearly every area except for one admittedly non-liberal position: I am entirely pro-life. I've already been blocked censored for being "rude and hurtful" because I dared speak my opinion on the matter.

8. Have you tried the LGBT group??

9. I'm far to the left of most here.

If anything, a Social Justice Catholic and a radical ecologist. If don't succeed in living up to my ideals in "real life" (I still drive a car, for example) I can still surely seek a path in politics that leads toward my Utopia.

I'll strongly support Obama because he's an extraordinarily competent leader whose goals lie somewhat in the direction of my own.

Romney and Ryan make my skin crawl, the same sick feeling I got witnessing Bush and Cheney. I think Ralph Nader played a part in Bush-Cheney horror too, maybe not so much as the corrupt election officials and the Supreme Court did, but Nader certainly contributed to the suppression of the Democratic Party vote. The Democratic and Republican Parties are not the same.

And yep, I'm "Pro-life" too, but it's not mine to make that choice for anyone else. I think there's something terribly wrong, yes even sinful, about the people who protest in front of Planned Parenthood, obstruct Planned Parenthood's funding and the funding of institutions like it, or think people like Pharmacists should be able to decide for themselves not to supply a town with contraceptives or "morning after" pills.

10. sinful to...

hunter you really think it is sinful to try to save an unborn baby...to change the mind of a woman who would end that life? so you would protest killing a 500 year old tree but not a woman killing an eternal child of god? hmmm.....i'm not sure I can go that route.

i can handle people telling me I am rude....just wasn't crazy about being blocked for stating an opinion that the censors thought didn't fit traditional liberal dogma.

12. I don't think any side has a corner on the need to be praying for their own sins.

sins of the right aren't more (or less) grave than sins on the left, so that was kinda self righteous, bro. Either way, you just proved my point...this site isn't a site populated by people interested in open, liberal-minded discussion. It is more a site for people who need self affirmation.

30. Not gay, but against abortion...

BUT, I feel that I cannot tell a woman to not have an abortion without offering to take and raise the child, regardless of its sex, ethnic background, health, or conditions under which it was conceived, or the medical background of the parents. That takes a lot of nerve.

Many children who were not wanted and were not aborted are often mistreated, abused, and generally not cared for, come home from school to an empty house, or where parents are under drugs, go without dinner or help with homework, have no clean clothes, are riciduled or worse, were compelled to get involved in crime just to get necessities. The prisons are filled with them.

As a Democrat, I feel that by supporting elected officials who pass laws to help children get food, clothing, and help the mother to get day care, food stamps, medical care, I may discourage a woman from even considering getting an abortion. An out-of-wedlock kid is not a disgrace anymore. To a Dem, the disgrace is in not helping the mother.

A question for you....when you look at the number of people in prison in this country, do you ever wonder if they wish they weren't born?

37. This is true, DPC. There are some things you simply cannot say...

even if they are your opinion and you say them in a rational non-rude way.

To be fair, not EVERYONE blocked you. There are just a few posters who run around hitting the alert button on everyone they disagree with.

Some jurors in voting whether to hide a post or not, gauge it solely on whether they agree with the post that was alerted on. I've served on some juries and seen responses that were comments disagreeing with the SUBSTANCE of the alerted-on post, rather than whether it's against the rules or rude, etc.

I could probably even write a list of what you are not allowed to say, according to those few posters.

Keep in mind it's not everyone. Most will accept a differing opinion and will simply argue back and forth with you, and THEY will be RUDE to you, but not alert on you.

You can expect some strenuous arguments when you disagree with something that's legal and a constitutional right, though. Which is as it should be. People SHOULD strongly argue for their constitional rights.

Turn it around. You say you are gay. Are you accepting of posters who are anti-gay, under all circumstances? Would you consider their posts not hurtful, not rude?

2. sign out and never come back n/t

3. the others are pulling your leg. Here's how you do it:

While standing upright, and with eyes closed, click your heels 3 times whiles saying "I'm a twit... I'm a twit... I'm a twit."

If you follow these instructions to the letter you will say "I'm a twit" a total of 9 times. Make sure you do this in front of your most trusted friends. Following this they will chant "THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO TELL YOU!!!"

42. I don't find reply #5 to be snarky. Is that a group think thing that all must agree w/that?

Because someone dares to state (in a non-rude fashion) a direct experience or observation, that therefore all holds barred, and the gimps are let out? (ref. to Pulp Fiction)

He simply stated he found the site to be a group think place like a tea party place.

The obvious response to that is that...this is a progressive site, and therefore, there is a sort of group think to it. That's one of the bases of a site of like-minded people. That doesn't mean that varying opinions are not accepted, as long as they fall into a "DU" focus area, and even outside of that, as long as mainly the person is of a progressive mindset.

Now THAT'S how you respond to a serious criticism of group think. Not "Oh, yeah...well, your mama wears army boots! Take that!"

41. Why are you here?

29. Ha!

Well I'm extremely thick skinned, and I can take as good as I give when it comes to differences of opinion. I've only been here for 5 days and I've already had a post "hidden" by the jury for being rude or crude! "Post was rude and offensive from a 1 day newbie!"

Hell...I'm 52 and I've been a democrat for 40 of those years! NEWBIES ASS! But what hurt more was I read the words "f**k" "s**t" "d**k" and about another dozen in some form or fashion on almost every thread I see on here. Yet I used the words "f**ng" and "d**k" as sarcasm and in a joke, not directed at anyone as most of the profanity I see, and I get reported and hidden? HAHAHAHA! WTF ever!

Obviously you can degrade someone with names and obscenities if your part of the "club", but don't try and be humorous, if you're a "newbie"! Sensitive, whiny ASSHOLES! I see your point DPC, but they're gonna have to kick me out! If you want them to cancel your account, my advice is.....send me a private message and I'll tell you the silly shit I got reported for, and you can post that on every thread until they delete your account! I'm sure that will get you deleted quicker than anything else you might try!

35. Oy. Lucky not to have been tombstoned for that one. n/t

43. I never said it was hidden

because I was a newbie. I said the person who reported it stated "and from a one day newbie!" Their words, not mine. So you find it gross. I found it funny! And I'm lucky I wasn't tomb stoned??? Seriously? So I would like the two of you to tell me... when is "dick" not a "dick"? Why is "fuck" allowed on every other post and no one seems to be reporting them, yet they have a problem with me saying it? If the original tagger found offense with mine, then they are nothing less than hypocrites if they don't flag every post that contains those words. You either have a problem with it, or you don't. That's not hard to understand is it? I take from this that those words are offensive, and that they need to start policing other instances of cursing more consistently.

44. It wasn't the words themselves. It was how you used them.

In response to a rumor that the Obama campaign was pulling out of North Carolina, you implied that the President was there to exploit NC and didn't care what sort of mess he left behind him. That's the sort of classy humor about the President we regularly see from RW trolls.